3 ms·

>and much of that damage will be suffered by China Signiciantly more will be suffered by US/west whose advanced industries extracts disproportionate patent fee

• credit_guy 4y ago
  > Significantly more will be suffered by US/west People can live without smartphones, but can't live without food. In case of war, westerners will need to postpone buying some electronics or clothes, but the Chinese will resort to severe food rationing.
  • Jensson 4y ago
    That is old data, today China produces more than enough to feed its population. They produce 650 million tons of grain a year which is more than enough for their population, and is a net exporter of meat. To make it easier to understand, total world grain production is about 2250 million tons for a population of 7.8 billion. At worst China would need to ration more expensive meals, but people wouldn't starve.
  • dirtyid 4y ago
    Someone else addressed per capita self sufficiency below. But operationally, this strategy is likely only if US has ability and appetite to enforce blockade from other producers. And likely only viable short term before PRC finishes conventional deterrence. As we can see with UKR, most of the world ignored sanctions on food and energy, including west. Keep in mind PRC is buying a lot of ag products from US because of Phase One trade deal. Medium long term, they'd rather decouple and build up other producers. Another Q one should ask is how vunerable US is to comparable counter action. Because US agriculture is highly industrialized and automated whereas PRC ag is in the process of automation and still reliant on labour. Sufficient cyber attack on US ag infra during harvest season and US is forced to ration. What happens to automated John Deere tractors when they have no GPS to harvest. Same with familiar threats of embargoing PRC oil because US is self sufficient on the metric that there's enough fossil fuel resources in the ground. US is only as self sufficient as how much it's 130 refineries can produce. If US interdicts PRC energy, don't be surprised if PRC takes down comparable levels of production state side.
    • CamperBob2 4y ago
      Abandoning trade with China will hurt us, certainly. But unless the Xi regime is overtly suicidal, that's all that will happen, and we'll eventually get over it. As for cyberattacks from China, those can only do so much, and in any case they can be mitigated by cutting the fiber. OTOH, shooting down GPS sats will lead to war. They know better than that. I hope.
      • dirtyid 4y ago
        > will lead to war This is in event of an war. Legally, so is blockading PRC, including food and energy imports which is not an unfamiliar discussion in US policy circles. As for cyber, US DoD / Biden also explicitly communicated to both PRC and RU that cyberwarfare on critical infra = actions comparable to war. I don't know if cutting fibre is a joke, there's millions of PRC diasphora, unless US disconnects from internet globally, that's assuming PRC agents aren't state side already. So the real question is, does the US know better than to intervene when PRC attempts armed reunification with TW, which seems increasingly likely while bills are being drawn in congress to boost TW into major non-Nato ally? Because if US does, there's no telling how things will escalate, especially when modern connectivity and increasing PRC missile capabilities means CONUS is no longer safe. Incidentally, I think both sides knows this, on paper but frequently, better judgement gets overriden by domestic politics.
• analognoise 4y ago
  China has an indigenous 7nm production capability - no EUV, so more multi patterning, but it still works.